Sentences with phrase «cycle models ignore»

Not exact matches

«It's a hypothesis, but it has been ignored in carbon cycle models until now, and we suggest it must be represented because it's potentially very important.»

For instance, the sensitivity only including the fast feedbacks (e.g. ignoring land ice and vegetation), or the sensitivity of a particular class of climate model (e.g. the «Charney sensitivity»), or the sensitivity of the whole system except the carbon cycle (the Earth System Sensitivity), or the transient sensitivity tied to a specific date or period of time (i.e. the Transient Climate Response (TCR) to 1 % increasing CO2 after 70 years).

A stern lesson from history Wyatt / Curry stadium waves require confirmation from analysis and computation; otherwise they risk being regarded as one more statistics - driven model, of which the climate literature already contains innumerably many... this large corpus of cycle - seeking pure - statistics climate models is (rightly) ignored by most scientists, due to the dismal track record of cycle - seeking science in regard to explanatory and predictive power.

We need to be careful focussing upon «trends» — it can lead to serious errors of context — and this underlies the entire «global warming» thesis which relies upon computer models with entirely false (i.e. non-natural) notions of an equilibrium starting point and calculations of trend — this conveniently ignores cycles, and it has to because a) there are several non-orbital cycles in motion (8 - 10 yr, 11, 22, 60, 70, 80, 400 and 1000 - 1500) depending on ocean basic, hemisphere and global view — all interacting via «teleconnection» of those ocean basins, some clearly timed by solar cycles, some peaking together; b) because the cycles are not exact, you can not tell in any one decade where you are in the longer cycles.

The Blogosphere is full of fake skeptics that think they have a good model just because they can get an arbitrary series of equations (usually «cycles») with arbitrary fitting of parameters, all while ignoring the known physics.

Anyway, keep up the revelations, we can now add Greenpeace inspired polemic to WWF reports, misquoting of effects, glaciers melting not, sea rising fast not, warming, if any, not happening at present, bad data, bad models, poor physics and ignoring of main natural factors (Sun, orbital variations, cosmic rays via cloud cover, ocean heating and cooling cycles, volcanoes, soots, aerosols, etc)

This behaviour was modelled through role plays, and young women were shown how to stop perpetuating the cycle of lateral violence by ignoring provocative messages.